[MD] Re Proposed solution to SOL/Intellectual level

[Mary]

Hello Khoo and all,

[Khoo Said]
The subject-object dichotomy rests on the belief
of a permanent "self" and a permanent "edifice" to build social and
intellectual patterns around... On what basis does your concept of the
permanence of a static level arise anyway ? ... The human "self" itself one
of these manifestations, evolved from enfolded and implicate patterns in a
universe of interdependent origination, is set on an unconscious 
course to persistently and ceaselessly recreate itself and in countless
manifestations... 
The "self " referred to in Buddhism is an aggregation of the senses of mind
and
matter; a thinking "self" capable of generating intellectual concepts and a
physical "self" capable of defining a physical identity through its five
sense-doors. It would be different if by self-awareness the "self" were
aware that it has no "self". The self is a pattern that is also
transitory - as with all other patterns - and 

[Mary puts emphasis to Khoo's words here]
the persistence of the "self" in convincing itself that it is permanent is
central to the subject-object divide. But this self has no permanent
existence in itself.

[Mary comments]
The entirety of Western Civilization is founded on the premise that the self
is real and that nothing else matters.  I tried to express this in a feeble
way previously by talking about the Ego, and was met with dead silence in
this forum precisely because this is an untouchable subject.  The Ego, I am
convinced, is/was necessary for survival, and is an artifact of the
Biological level.  It was commandeered by the Social level at some point,
and made to serve different masters, but is unchanged.  It is deeply
embedded in the human psyche and is the root of all emotion.  

ALL Western religions are based on the premise of preserving the Ego (the
Self).  There is no higher calling in the Western world than worshipping and
paying homage to the almighty Ego.  That "God made Man in his own image", is
an enormously Ego affirming idea.  My own Southern Baptist grandfather was
buried in a sealed metal enclosure containing his casket precisely because
he believed he would be coming back on judgment day and that original body
must be preserved.  

But it is a secret.  In the Orient, at least, Ego is out in the open,
perhaps because it is seen for what it is?  Perhaps it does not hold the
supreme power is has over here?  Orientals have a publically acknowledged
concept of "saving face".  You would NEVER hear somebody say that out loud
in the West.  Though we are all totally in service to the care and feeding
our individual Egos, we persist in the fiction that it does not exist, or if
it does, it should not be discussed in polite company.  To admit that you
are angered by something because it bruises your Ego is incredibly
embarrassing in the West.  You will never hear a church discuss Ego, yet
every single thing they preach is designed in a round-about way to reassure
its followers of the preservation of their unique, individual, personal Ego
for eternity.  In the West, to even admit out loud that you have one is
shameful.

I feel a deep resonance with your words from 2003.  If you are not a
Westerner, you may not realize that Pirsig was really pretty smart.  I don't
recall his mentioning the word Ego once in his books.  If he had, he would
have been doomed to ridicule by one and all.  He knew better, I think, and
that is why I say that the MoQ is his attempt to make Buddhism
understandable to the West.  By constructing the levels and the static
patterns, and by refusing to explain DQ in other than the most cursory way,
he gave us Westerners the gift of a little bit of insight without offending
our Egos.  We would not have stood for that and he knew it.

SOM is a construct of the Ego, and I am as rooted in it as anybody else.  As
a Westerner, I have no idea where to go with this, but I've managed to come
to the conclusion that the Ego changed long ago from the life-saving mental
construction it originally was needed to be, into the most damaging thing
possible when combined with higher-order intelligence. Unfortunately, as I
already said, the entirety of Western Civilization is founded upon its care
and feeding.  Every social, political, corporate, and religious institution
we have is founded on it.  Pirsig saw this, I feel certain.

Thank you, Khoo, for your re-post.
Mary

[Khoo continues]
Static Quality in itself is therefore neutral, neither good nor bad, as
patterns go - however the clinging and the desire to
persist as patterns is not good in any form. In buddhistic terms the karmic
vector of attachment, the driving force of the patterns, does not lead to
Good... The manifestation of a "self" distinct and separate from a universe
of objects, is brought about by an attachment to inorganic, biological,
social and intellectual patterns and this attachment is an
immensely powerful, at times overpowering force for the "self" to persist
and perpetuate over and over again.
...
In Buddhism, the letting go of a pattern, of any pattern, is considered
good, and each step in this direction is a step taken towards realising
nirvana or in my view, Dynamic Quality. Dynamic Quality here is, as Static
Quality is - neutral. The morality of our actions hence is determined by the
degree with which we cling on to static quality (patterns of any value) or
release a static quality (patterns of any value) of its hold on our imagined
"selves".
...
The intellectual patterns generated by the mind can extremely addictive -
and many "selves" are totally absorbed by them
to the detriment of everything else. Intellect may help the "self" to
understand reality but can never help the 'self" to achieve a direct
experience of reality. As I have mentioned before, I believe intellect to be

vicarious knowledge: the mind's idea of reality not a direct experience of
reality itself. The intellect may also lead the "self" to imagine it as an
individual with inherent rights on the basis of its intellect and consider
that the individual is superior to all other patterns beneath it. The
intellect generates patterns of Static Quality, but when combined with
notions of individuality, becomes an intellectual level separated from
Dynamic Quality, a metaphysical dead-end.